Cyber Resilience

CVE-2023-34395

Apache-Airflow-Providers-Odbc ≤ 4.0.0

Published
27 June 2023
Modified
21 November 2024
Patch / advisory
View advisory
CVSS Score v3.1 7.8
Click a component to see what it means
Raw vectorCVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
EPSS Score 0.0075 52th percentile
Risk Priority 58 floored blend · peak EPSS

Summary

CVE-2023-34395 is a high-severity Argument Injection (CWE-88) vulnerability in Apache Apache-Airflow-Providers-Odbc. Its CVSS base score is 7.8 (High).

Operationally, exploitation aligns with the MITRE ATT&CK technique Command and Scripting Interpreter (T1059); ranked in the top 48% of CVEs by exploit likelihood; it is not currently listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

OWASP Top 10 for Web (2025)

A05:2025 Injection

EU & UK References

Vulnerability Data

Improper Neutralization of Argument Delimiters in a Command ('Argument Injection') vulnerability in Apache Software Foundation Apache Airflow ODBC Provider. In OdbcHook, A privilege escalation vulnerability exists in a system due to controllable ODBC driver parameters that allow the loading of…

more

arbitrary dynamic-link libraries, resulting in command execution. Starting version 4.0.0 driver can be set only from the hook constructor. This issue affects Apache Airflow ODBC Provider: before 4.0.0.

CWE(s)
CWE-88

Related Threats

MITRE ATT&CK Enterprise Techniques

T1059 Command and Scripting Interpreter Execution
Adversaries may abuse command and script interpreters to execute commands, scripts, or binaries.
attack.mitre.org →
T1059.001 PowerShell Execution
Adversaries may abuse PowerShell commands and scripts for execution.
attack.mitre.org →
T1059.003 Windows Command Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse the Windows command shell for execution.
attack.mitre.org →
T1059.004 Unix Shell Execution
Adversaries may abuse Unix shell commands and scripts for execution.
attack.mitre.org →
Derived from this CVE’s CWE(s) via the direct CWE→ATT&CK cross-walk.

CVEs Like This One

CVE-2026-40047Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2023-35798Same product: Apache Apache-Airflow-Providers-Odbc
CVE-2023-47804Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2022-24697Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2020-1956Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2020-11978Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2022-24288Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2026-62392Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2025-54941Same vendor: Apache
CVE-2015-7611Same vendor: Apache

Affected Assets

apache
apache-airflow-providers-odbc
≤ 4.0.0

Mitigating Controls

Control response

Prevent
Stop it (NIST 800-53)

—

Detect
Catch it (NIST detect / respond)

—

Harden
Shrink the surface (DISA STIG)

—

Validate
Prove the fix (OWASP ASVS)
  • V1.2.5

Mitigating Controls (NIST CSF 2.0) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→CSF cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

PR.PS-06 mostly match
prevents

Secure SDLC practices directly require proper input validation and command construction to prevent argument injection.

Mitigating Controls (ISO/IEC 27001:2022 Annex A) AI

Derived directly from the weakness types (CWEs) cited in the NVD entry via our AI-authored CWE→ISO cross-walk (authority under review) — links open the control.

A.8.29 Security testing in development and acceptance mostly match
finds

Security testing can detect argument injection but does not prevent it at the source.

A.8.25 Secure development life cycle partial match
prevents

Secure development lifecycle mandates input validation and command construction practices that directly prevent argument injection.

A.8.26 Application security requirements partial match
prevents

Application security requirements include explicit rules for safe command-line argument handling and escaping.

A.8.27 Secure system architecture and engineering principles partial match
prevents

Secure architecture principles discourage unsafe command invocation patterns and favor safer APIs.

A.8.28 Secure coding partial match
prevents

Secure coding standards explicitly require proper neutralization of command arguments, directly eliminating CWE-88.

A.8.32 Change management none match
none

Change management can catch unsafe command patterns during reviews but is not a direct mitigation.

References